Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2016 04:00:24 +0300 From: Andrey Chernov <ache@freebsd.org> To: Mark Millard <markmi@dsl-only.net> Cc: svn-src-head@freebsd.org, FreeBSD Current <freebsd-current@freebsd.org>, freebsd-stable@freebsd.org, freebsd-arm <freebsd-arm@freebsd.org>, FreeBSD PowerPC ML <freebsd-ppc@freebsd.org>, Bruce Evans <brde@optusnet.com.au>, FreeBSD Toolchain <freebsd-toolchain@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: svn commit: r302601 - in head/sys: arm/include arm64/include [clang 3.8.0: powerpc has odd mix of signed wchar_t and unsigned char] Message-ID: <a3f33812-1780-024e-4638-994c56e45c42@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <38CF2C28-3BD1-4D09-939F-4DD0C2E8B58F@dsl-only.net> References: <46153340-D2F4-48BD-B738-4792BC25FA3F@dsl-only.net> <b4d1b3d9-9577-3f89-c13e-8c46d1ddee95@freebsd.org> <38CF2C28-3BD1-4D09-939F-4DD0C2E8B58F@dsl-only.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 13.07.2016 11:53, Mark Millard wrote: > [The below does note that TARGET=powerpc has a mix of signed wchar_t and unsigned char types and most architectures have both being signed types.] POSIX says nothing about wchar_t and char should be the same (un)signed. It is arm ABI docs may say so only. They are different entities differently encoded and cross assigning between wchar_t and char is not recommended. > > On 2016-Jul-11, at 8:57 PM, Andrey Chernov <ache at freebsd.org> wrote: > >> On 12.07.2016 5:44, Mark Millard wrote: >>> My understanding of the criteria for __WCHAR_MIN and __WCHAR_MAX: >>> >>> A) __WCHAR_MIN and __WCHAR_MAX: same type as the integer promotion of >>> ___wchar_t (if that is distinct). >>> B) __WCHAR_MIN is the low value for ___wchar_t as an integer type; not >>> necessarily a valid char value >>> C) __WCHAR_MAX is the high value for ___wchar_t as an integer type; not >>> necessarily a valid char value >> >> It seems you are right about "not a valid char value", I'll back this >> change out. >> >>> As far as I know arm FreeBSD uses unsigned character types (of whatever >>> width). >> >> Probably it should be unsigned for other architectures too, clang does >> not generate negative values with L'<char>' literals and locale use only >> positive values too. > > Looking around: > > # grep -i wchar sys/*/include/_types.h > sys/arm/include/_types.h:typedef unsigned int ___wchar_t; > sys/arm/include/_types.h:#define __WCHAR_MIN 0 /* min value for a wchar_t */ > sys/arm/include/_types.h:#define __WCHAR_MAX __UINT_MAX /* max value for a wchar_t */ > sys/arm64/include/_types.h:typedef unsigned int ___wchar_t; > sys/arm64/include/_types.h:#define __WCHAR_MIN 0 /* min value for a wchar_t */ > sys/arm64/include/_types.h:#define __WCHAR_MAX __UINT_MAX /* max value for a wchar_t */ > sys/mips/include/_types.h:typedef int ___wchar_t; > sys/mips/include/_types.h:#define __WCHAR_MIN __INT_MIN /* min value for a wchar_t */ > sys/mips/include/_types.h:#define __WCHAR_MAX __INT_MAX /* max value for a wchar_t */ > sys/powerpc/include/_types.h:typedef int ___wchar_t; > sys/powerpc/include/_types.h:#define __WCHAR_MIN __INT_MIN /* min value for a wchar_t */ > sys/powerpc/include/_types.h:#define __WCHAR_MAX __INT_MAX /* max value for a wchar_t */ > sys/riscv/include/_types.h:typedef int ___wchar_t; > sys/riscv/include/_types.h:#define __WCHAR_MIN __INT_MIN /* min value for a wchar_t */ > sys/riscv/include/_types.h:#define __WCHAR_MAX __INT_MAX /* max value for a wchar_t */ > sys/sparc64/include/_types.h:typedef int ___wchar_t; > sys/sparc64/include/_types.h:#define __WCHAR_MIN __INT_MIN /* min value for a wchar_t */ > sys/sparc64/include/_types.h:#define __WCHAR_MAX __INT_MAX /* max value for a wchar_t */ > sys/x86/include/_types.h:typedef int ___wchar_t; > sys/x86/include/_types.h:#define __WCHAR_MIN __INT_MIN /* min value for a wchar_t */ > sys/x86/include/_types.h:#define __WCHAR_MAX __INT_MAX /* max value for a wchar_t */ > > So only arm and arm64 have unsigned wchar_t types. > > [NOTE: __CHAR16_TYPE__ and __CHAR32_TYPE__ are always unsigned: in C++11 terms char16_t is like std::uint_least16_t and char32_t is like std::uint_least32_t despite being distinct types. So __CHAR16_TYPE__ and __CHAR32_TYPE__ are ignored below.] > > The clang 3.8.0 compiler output has an odd mix for TARGET_ARCH=powerpc and TARGET_ARCH=powerpc64 . . . > > armv6 has unsigned types for both char and __WCHAR_TYPE__. > aarch64 has unsigned types for both char and __WCHAR_TYPE__. > powerpc has unsigned for char but signed for __WCHAR_TYPE__. > powerpc64 has unsigned for char but signed for __WCHAR_TYPE__. > amd64 has signed types for both char and __WCHAR_TYPE__. > i386 has signed types for both char and __WCHAR_TYPE__. > mips has signed types for both char and __WCHAR_TYPE__. > sparc64 has signed types for both char and __WCHAR_TYPE__. > (riscv is not covered by clang as I understand) > > The details via compiler #define's. . . > > # clang --target=armv6-freebsd11 -std=c99 -E -dM - < /dev/null | more > . . . > #define __BYTE_ORDER__ __ORDER_LITTLE_ENDIAN__ > . . . > #define __CHAR_BIT__ 8 > #define __CHAR_UNSIGNED__ 1 > . . . > #define __WCHAR_MAX__ 4294967295U > #define __WCHAR_TYPE__ unsigned int > #define __WCHAR_UNSIGNED__ 1 > #define __WCHAR_WIDTH__ 32 > . . . > > # clang --target=aarch64-freebsd11 -std=c99 -E -dM - < /dev/null | more > . . . > #define __BYTE_ORDER__ __ORDER_LITTLE_ENDIAN__ > . . . > #define __CHAR_BIT__ 8 > #define __CHAR_UNSIGNED__ 1 > . . . > #define __WCHAR_MAX__ 4294967295U > #define __WCHAR_TYPE__ unsigned int > #define __WCHAR_UNSIGNED__ 1 > #define __WCHAR_WIDTH__ 32 > . . . > > # clang --target=powerpc-freebsd11 -std=c99 -E -dM - < /dev/null | more > . . . > #define __BYTE_ORDER__ __ORDER_BIG_ENDIAN__ > . . . > #define __CHAR_BIT__ 8 > #define __CHAR_UNSIGNED__ 1 > . . . > #define __WCHAR_MAX__ 2147483647 > #define __WCHAR_TYPE__ int > #define __WCHAR_WIDTH__ 32 > . . . (note the lack of __WCHAR_UNSIGNED__) . . . > > Is powerpc wrong? > > # clang --target=powerpc64-freebsd11 -std=c99 -E -dM - < /dev/null | more > . . . > #define __BYTE_ORDER__ __ORDER_BIG_ENDIAN__ > . . . > #define __CHAR_BIT__ 8 > #define __CHAR_UNSIGNED__ 1 > . . . > #define __WCHAR_MAX__ 2147483647 > #define __WCHAR_TYPE__ int > #define __WCHAR_WIDTH__ 32 > . . . (note the lack of __WCHAR_UNSIGNED__) . . . > > Is powerpc64 wrong? > > > # clang --target=amd64-freebsd11 -std=c99 -E -dM - < /dev/null | more > . . . > #define __BYTE_ORDER__ __ORDER_LITTLE_ENDIAN__ > . . . > #define __CHAR_BIT__ 8 > . . . (note the lack of __CHAR_UNSIGNED__) . . . > > #define __WCHAR_MAX__ 2147483647 > #define __WCHAR_TYPE__ int > #define __WCHAR_WIDTH__ 32 > . . . (note the lack of __WCHAR_UNSIGNED__) . . . > > # clang --target=i386-freebsd11 -std=c99 -E -dM - < /dev/null | more > . . . > #define __BYTE_ORDER__ __ORDER_LITTLE_ENDIAN__ > . . . > #define __CHAR_BIT__ 8 > . . . (note the lack of __CHAR_UNSIGNED__) . . . > > #define __WCHAR_MAX__ 2147483647 > #define __WCHAR_TYPE__ int > #define __WCHAR_WIDTH__ 32 > . . . (note the lack of __WCHAR_UNSIGNED__) . . . > > > # clang --target=mips-freebsd11 -std=c99 -E -dM - < /dev/null | more > . . . > #define __BYTE_ORDER__ __ORDER_BIG_ENDIAN__ > . . . > #define __CHAR_BIT__ 8 > . . . (note the lack of __CHAR_UNSIGNED__) . . . > > #define __WCHAR_MAX__ 2147483647 > #define __WCHAR_TYPE__ int > #define __WCHAR_WIDTH__ 32 > . . . (note the lack of __WCHAR_UNSIGNED__) . . . > > # clang --target=sparc64-freebsd11 -std=c99 -E -dM - < /dev/null | more > . . . > #define __BYTE_ORDER__ __ORDER_BIG_ENDIAN__ > . . . > #define __CHAR_BIT__ 8 > . . . (note the lack of __CHAR_UNSIGNED__) . . . > > #define __WCHAR_MAX__ 2147483647 > #define __WCHAR_TYPE__ int > #define __WCHAR_WIDTH__ 32 > . . . (note the lack of __WCHAR_UNSIGNED__) . . . > > > > === > Mark Millard > markmi at dsl-only.net >
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?a3f33812-1780-024e-4638-994c56e45c42>